thr3ads.net - Xen devel - [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Stefano Stabellini

2010-Nov-19 13:58 UTC

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

Use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

Use the new hypercall PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to ask Xen to allocate a
pirq. Remove the unsupported PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs hypercall to get the
amount of pirq available.

Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>

diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c
index 321a0c8..ffd286e 100644
--- a/drivers/xen/events.c
+++ b/drivers/xen/events.c
@@ -382,12 +382,17 @@ static int get_nr_hw_irqs(void)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-/* callers of this function should make sure that PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
- * succeeded otherwise nr_pirqs won''t hold the right value */
-static int find_unbound_pirq(void)
+static int find_unbound_pirq(int type)
 {
-	int i;
-	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
+	int rc, i;
+	struct physdev_get_free_pirq op_get_free_pirq;
+	op_get_free_pirq.type = type;
+
+	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq, &op_get_free_pirq);
+	if (!rc)
+		return op_get_free_pirq.pirq;
+
+	for (i = 16; i <= nr_pirqs-1; i++) {
 		if (pirq_to_irq[i] < 0)
 			return i;
 	}
@@ -669,7 +674,7 @@ void xen_allocate_pirq_msi(char *name, int *irq, int *pirq)
 	if (*irq == -1)
 		goto out;
 
-	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq();
+	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq(MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI);
 	if (*pirq == -1)
 		goto out;
 
@@ -1504,23 +1509,12 @@ void xen_callback_vector(void) {}
 void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
 {
 	int i, rc;
-	struct physdev_nr_pirqs op_nr_pirqs;
 
 	cpu_evtchn_mask_p = kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(struct cpu_evtchn_s),
 				    GFP_KERNEL);
 	irq_info = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*irq_info), GFP_KERNEL);
 
-	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs, &op_nr_pirqs);
-	if (rc < 0) {
-		nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
-		if (rc != -ENOSYS)
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs returned rc=%d\n",
rc);
-	} else {
-		if (xen_pv_domain() && !xen_initial_domain())
-			nr_pirqs = max((int)op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs, nr_irqs);
-		else
-			nr_pirqs = op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs;
-	}
+	nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
 	pirq_to_irq = kcalloc(nr_pirqs, sizeof(*pirq_to_irq), GFP_KERNEL);
 	for (i = 0; i < nr_pirqs; i++)
 		pirq_to_irq[i] = -1;
diff --git a/include/xen/interface/physdev.h b/include/xen/interface/physdev.h
index 2b2c66c..534cac8 100644
--- a/include/xen/interface/physdev.h
+++ b/include/xen/interface/physdev.h
@@ -188,6 +188,16 @@ struct physdev_nr_pirqs {
     uint32_t nr_pirqs;
 };
 
+/* type is MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_GSI or MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI
+ * the hypercall returns a free pirq */
+#define PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq    23
+struct physdev_get_free_pirq {
+    /* IN */ 
+    int type;
+    /* OUT */
+    uint32_t pirq;
+};
+
 /*
  * Notify that some PIRQ-bound event channels have been unmasked.
  * ** This command is obsolete since interface version 0x00030202 and is **

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk

2010-Nov-19 16:23 UTC

head link

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 01:58:03PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini
wrote:> Use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq
> 
> Use the new hypercall PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to ask Xen to allocate a
> pirq. Remove the unsupported PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs hypercall to get the
> amount of pirq available.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c
> index 321a0c8..ffd286e 100644
> --- a/drivers/xen/events.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/events.c
> @@ -382,12 +382,17 @@ static int get_nr_hw_irqs(void)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -/* callers of this function should make sure that PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
> - * succeeded otherwise nr_pirqs won''t hold the right value */
> -static int find_unbound_pirq(void)
> +static int find_unbound_pirq(int type)
>  {
> -	int i;
> -	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> +	int rc, i;
> +	struct physdev_get_free_pirq op_get_free_pirq;
> +	op_get_free_pirq.type = type;
> +
> +	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq,
&op_get_free_pirq);
> +	if (!rc)
> +		return op_get_free_pirq.pirq;
> +
> +	for (i = 16; i <= nr_pirqs-1; i++) {
16? No no. Why not re-use the old loop, like so:

 	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
>  		if (pirq_to_irq[i] < 0)
>  			return i;
>  	}
> @@ -669,7 +674,7 @@ void xen_allocate_pirq_msi(char *name, int *irq, int
*pirq)
>  	if (*irq == -1)
>  		goto out;
>  
> -	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq();
> +	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq(MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI);
>  	if (*pirq == -1)
>  		goto out;
>  
> @@ -1504,23 +1509,12 @@ void xen_callback_vector(void) {}
>  void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
>  {
>  	int i, rc;
> -	struct physdev_nr_pirqs op_nr_pirqs;
>  
>  	cpu_evtchn_mask_p = kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(struct cpu_evtchn_s),
>  				    GFP_KERNEL);
>  	irq_info = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*irq_info), GFP_KERNEL);
>  
> -	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs, &op_nr_pirqs);
> -	if (rc < 0) {
> -		nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> -		if (rc != -ENOSYS)
> -			printk(KERN_WARNING "PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs returned
rc=%d\n", rc);
> -	} else {
> -		if (xen_pv_domain() && !xen_initial_domain())
> -			nr_pirqs = max((int)op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs, nr_irqs);
> -		else
> -			nr_pirqs = op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs;
> -	}
> +	nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
Why not just get rid of nr_pirgs altogether then? And use
''nr_irqs'' instead?

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Stefano Stabellini

2010-Nov-20 01:19 UTC

head link

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 01:58:03PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq
> > 
> > Use the new hypercall PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to ask Xen to allocate a
> > pirq. Remove the unsupported PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs hypercall to get
the
> > amount of pirq available.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini
<stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c
> > index 321a0c8..ffd286e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/xen/events.c
> > +++ b/drivers/xen/events.c
> > @@ -382,12 +382,17 @@ static int get_nr_hw_irqs(void)
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > -/* callers of this function should make sure that
PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
> > - * succeeded otherwise nr_pirqs won''t hold the right value
*/
> > -static int find_unbound_pirq(void)
> > +static int find_unbound_pirq(int type)
> >  {
> > -	int i;
> > -	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > +	int rc, i;
> > +	struct physdev_get_free_pirq op_get_free_pirq;
> > +	op_get_free_pirq.type = type;
> > +
> > +	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq,
&op_get_free_pirq);
> > +	if (!rc)
> > +		return op_get_free_pirq.pirq;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 16; i <= nr_pirqs-1; i++) {
> 
> 16? No no. Why not re-use the old loop, like so:
> 
>  	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> 
Because we don''t know the real nr_pirqs anymore (PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
has been removed), so it is highly possible that starting from the top
down would give us pirq numbers out of range in Xen.  Therefore we need
to start from the bottom up, and the bottom for Xen is 16.

> >  		if (pirq_to_irq[i] < 0)
> >  			return i;
> >  	}
> > @@ -669,7 +674,7 @@ void xen_allocate_pirq_msi(char *name, int *irq,
int *pirq)
> >  	if (*irq == -1)
> >  		goto out;
> >  
> > -	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq();
> > +	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq(MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI);
> >  	if (*pirq == -1)
> >  		goto out;
> >  
> > @@ -1504,23 +1509,12 @@ void xen_callback_vector(void) {}
> >  void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
> >  {
> >  	int i, rc;
> > -	struct physdev_nr_pirqs op_nr_pirqs;
> >  
> >  	cpu_evtchn_mask_p = kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(struct cpu_evtchn_s),
> >  				    GFP_KERNEL);
> >  	irq_info = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*irq_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> >  
> > -	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs,
&op_nr_pirqs);
> > -	if (rc < 0) {
> > -		nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> > -		if (rc != -ENOSYS)
> > -			printk(KERN_WARNING "PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs returned
rc=%d\n", rc);
> > -	} else {
> > -		if (xen_pv_domain() && !xen_initial_domain())
> > -			nr_pirqs = max((int)op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs, nr_irqs);
> > -		else
> > -			nr_pirqs = op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs;
> > -	}
> > +	nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> 
> Why not just get rid of nr_pirgs altogether then? And use
''nr_irqs'' instead?
> 
Yeah, I guess we could do that. I kept it around just to make it more
obvious that the max pirq number is different from nr_irqs and we don''t
know what the exact value is.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk

2010-Nov-22 16:14 UTC

head link

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:19:31AM +0000, Stefano Stabellini
wrote:> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 01:58:03PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq
> > > 
> > > Use the new hypercall PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to ask Xen to
allocate a
> > > pirq. Remove the unsupported PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs hypercall to
get the
> > > amount of pirq available.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini
<stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c
> > > index 321a0c8..ffd286e 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/xen/events.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/xen/events.c
> > > @@ -382,12 +382,17 @@ static int get_nr_hw_irqs(void)
> > >  	return ret;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -/* callers of this function should make sure that
PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
> > > - * succeeded otherwise nr_pirqs won''t hold the right
value */
> > > -static int find_unbound_pirq(void)
> > > +static int find_unbound_pirq(int type)
> > >  {
> > > -	int i;
> > > -	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > > +	int rc, i;
> > > +	struct physdev_get_free_pirq op_get_free_pirq;
> > > +	op_get_free_pirq.type = type;
> > > +
> > > +	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq,
&op_get_free_pirq);
> > > +	if (!rc)
> > > +		return op_get_free_pirq.pirq;
> > > +
> > > +	for (i = 16; i <= nr_pirqs-1; i++) {
> > 
> > 16? No no. Why not re-use the old loop, like so:
> > 
> >  	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > 
> 
> Because we don''t know the real nr_pirqs anymore
(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
> has been removed), so it is highly possible that starting from the top
> down would give us pirq numbers out of range in Xen.  Therefore we need
> to start from the bottom up, and the bottom for Xen is 16.
Right, I forgot about the hypercall call. How about using LEGACY_IRQ instead
then?
> 
> 
> > >  		if (pirq_to_irq[i] < 0)
> > >  			return i;
> > >  	}
> > > @@ -669,7 +674,7 @@ void xen_allocate_pirq_msi(char *name, int
*irq, int *pirq)
> > >  	if (*irq == -1)
> > >  		goto out;
> > >  
> > > -	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq();
> > > +	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq(MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI);
> > >  	if (*pirq == -1)
> > >  		goto out;
> > >  
> > > @@ -1504,23 +1509,12 @@ void xen_callback_vector(void) {}
> > >  void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
> > >  {
> > >  	int i, rc;
> > > -	struct physdev_nr_pirqs op_nr_pirqs;
> > >  
> > >  	cpu_evtchn_mask_p = kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(struct
cpu_evtchn_s),
> > >  				    GFP_KERNEL);
> > >  	irq_info = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*irq_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >  
> > > -	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs,
&op_nr_pirqs);
> > > -	if (rc < 0) {
> > > -		nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> > > -		if (rc != -ENOSYS)
> > > -			printk(KERN_WARNING "PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs returned
rc=%d\n", rc);
> > > -	} else {
> > > -		if (xen_pv_domain() && !xen_initial_domain())
> > > -			nr_pirqs = max((int)op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs, nr_irqs);
> > > -		else
> > > -			nr_pirqs = op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs;
> > > -	}
> > > +	nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> > 
> > Why not just get rid of nr_pirgs altogether then? And use
''nr_irqs'' instead?
> > 
> 
> Yeah, I guess we could do that. I kept it around just to make it more
> obvious that the max pirq number is different from nr_irqs and we
don''t
> know what the exact value is.

But with this change it is the same, is it not?

	"nr_pirgs = nr_irqs;"

Or when you say "max pirq" you are referring to something else
altogether?

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Stefano Stabellini

2010-Nov-23 12:55 UTC

head link

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:19:31AM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 01:58:03PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini
wrote:
> > > > Use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq
> > > > 
> > > > Use the new hypercall PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to ask Xen to
allocate a
> > > > pirq. Remove the unsupported PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
hypercall to get the
> > > > amount of pirq available.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini
<stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c
> > > > index 321a0c8..ffd286e 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/xen/events.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/xen/events.c
> > > > @@ -382,12 +382,17 @@ static int get_nr_hw_irqs(void)
> > > >  	return ret;
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > > -/* callers of this function should make sure that
PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
> > > > - * succeeded otherwise nr_pirqs won''t hold the
right value */
> > > > -static int find_unbound_pirq(void)
> > > > +static int find_unbound_pirq(int type)
> > > >  {
> > > > -	int i;
> > > > -	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > > > +	int rc, i;
> > > > +	struct physdev_get_free_pirq op_get_free_pirq;
> > > > +	op_get_free_pirq.type = type;
> > > > +
> > > > +	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq,
&op_get_free_pirq);
> > > > +	if (!rc)
> > > > +		return op_get_free_pirq.pirq;
> > > > +
> > > > +	for (i = 16; i <= nr_pirqs-1; i++) {
> > > 
> > > 16? No no. Why not re-use the old loop, like so:
> > > 
> > >  	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > > 
> > 
> > Because we don''t know the real nr_pirqs anymore
(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
> > has been removed), so it is highly possible that starting from the top
> > down would give us pirq numbers out of range in Xen.  Therefore we
need
> > to start from the bottom up, and the bottom for Xen is 16.
> 
> Right, I forgot about the hypercall call. How about using LEGACY_IRQ
instead then?
> 
Do you mean NR_IRQS_LEGACY? Yeah, I could do that.
> > 
> > 
> > > >  		if (pirq_to_irq[i] < 0)
> > > >  			return i;
> > > >  	}
> > > > @@ -669,7 +674,7 @@ void xen_allocate_pirq_msi(char *name,
int *irq, int *pirq)
> > > >  	if (*irq == -1)
> > > >  		goto out;
> > > >  
> > > > -	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq();
> > > > +	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq(MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI);
> > > >  	if (*pirq == -1)
> > > >  		goto out;
> > > >  
> > > > @@ -1504,23 +1509,12 @@ void xen_callback_vector(void) {}
> > > >  void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	int i, rc;
> > > > -	struct physdev_nr_pirqs op_nr_pirqs;
> > > >  
> > > >  	cpu_evtchn_mask_p = kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(struct
cpu_evtchn_s),
> > > >  				    GFP_KERNEL);
> > > >  	irq_info = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*irq_info),
GFP_KERNEL);
> > > >  
> > > > -	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs,
&op_nr_pirqs);
> > > > -	if (rc < 0) {
> > > > -		nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> > > > -		if (rc != -ENOSYS)
> > > > -			printk(KERN_WARNING "PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
returned rc=%d\n", rc);
> > > > -	} else {
> > > > -		if (xen_pv_domain() && !xen_initial_domain())
> > > > -			nr_pirqs = max((int)op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs, nr_irqs);
> > > > -		else
> > > > -			nr_pirqs = op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs;
> > > > -	}
> > > > +	nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
> > > 
> > > Why not just get rid of nr_pirgs altogether then? And use
''nr_irqs'' instead?
> > > 
> > 
> > Yeah, I guess we could do that. I kept it around just to make it more
> > obvious that the max pirq number is different from nr_irqs and we
don''t
> > know what the exact value is.
> 
> 
> But with this change it is the same, is it not?
> 
> 	"nr_pirgs = nr_irqs;"
> 
> Or when you say "max pirq" you are referring to something else
altogether?
> 
Yes, it is the same. I guess a comment would be better then.

Appended the updated version of this patch.

---

Use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

Use the new hypercall PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to ask Xen to allocate a
pirq. Remove the unsupported PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs hypercall to get the
amount of pirq available.

Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>


diff --git a/drivers/xen/events.c b/drivers/xen/events.c
index 2811bb9..9f19daa 100644
--- a/drivers/xen/events.c
+++ b/drivers/xen/events.c
@@ -105,7 +105,6 @@ struct irq_info
 
 static struct irq_info *irq_info;
 static int *pirq_to_irq;
-static int nr_pirqs;
 
 static int *evtchn_to_irq;
 struct cpu_evtchn_s {
@@ -385,12 +384,17 @@ static int get_nr_hw_irqs(void)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-/* callers of this function should make sure that PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs
- * succeeded otherwise nr_pirqs won''t hold the right value */
-static int find_unbound_pirq(void)
+static int find_unbound_pirq(int type)
 {
-	int i;
-	for (i = nr_pirqs-1; i >= 0; i--) {
+	int rc, i;
+	struct physdev_get_free_pirq op_get_free_pirq;
+	op_get_free_pirq.type = type;
+
+	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq, &op_get_free_pirq);
+	if (!rc)
+		return op_get_free_pirq.pirq;
+
+	for (i = NR_IRQS_LEGACY; i <= nr_irqs-1; i++) {
 		if (pirq_to_irq[i] < 0)
 			return i;
 	}
@@ -611,9 +615,9 @@ int xen_map_pirq_gsi(unsigned pirq, unsigned gsi, int
shareable, char *name)
 
 	spin_lock(&irq_mapping_update_lock);
 
-	if ((pirq > nr_pirqs) || (gsi > nr_irqs)) {
+	if ((pirq > nr_irqs) || (gsi > nr_irqs)) {
 		printk(KERN_WARNING "xen_map_pirq_gsi: %s %s is incorrect!\n",
-			pirq > nr_pirqs ? "nr_pirqs" :"",
+			pirq > nr_irqs ? "nr_pirqs" :"",
 			gsi > nr_irqs ? "nr_irqs" : "");
 		goto out;
 	}
@@ -672,7 +676,7 @@ void xen_allocate_pirq_msi(char *name, int *irq, int *pirq)
 	if (*irq == -1)
 		goto out;
 
-	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq();
+	*pirq = find_unbound_pirq(MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI);
 	if (*pirq == -1)
 		goto out;
 
@@ -1506,26 +1510,17 @@ void xen_callback_vector(void) {}
 
 void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
 {
-	int i, rc;
-	struct physdev_nr_pirqs op_nr_pirqs;
+	int i;
 
 	cpu_evtchn_mask_p = kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(struct cpu_evtchn_s),
 				    GFP_KERNEL);
 	irq_info = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*irq_info), GFP_KERNEL);
 
-	rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs, &op_nr_pirqs);
-	if (rc < 0) {
-		nr_pirqs = nr_irqs;
-		if (rc != -ENOSYS)
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "PHYSDEVOP_get_nr_pirqs returned rc=%d\n",
rc);
-	} else {
-		if (xen_pv_domain() && !xen_initial_domain())
-			nr_pirqs = max((int)op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs, nr_irqs);
-		else
-			nr_pirqs = op_nr_pirqs.nr_pirqs;
-	}
-	pirq_to_irq = kcalloc(nr_pirqs, sizeof(*pirq_to_irq), GFP_KERNEL);
-	for (i = 0; i < nr_pirqs; i++)
+	/* We are using nr_irqs as the maximum number of pirq available but
+	 * that number is actually chosen by Xen and we don''t know exactly
+	 * what it is. Be careful choosing high pirq numbers. */
+	pirq_to_irq = kcalloc(nr_irqs, sizeof(*pirq_to_irq), GFP_KERNEL);
+	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++)
 		pirq_to_irq[i] = -1;
 
 	evtchn_to_irq = kcalloc(NR_EVENT_CHANNELS, sizeof(*evtchn_to_irq),
diff --git a/include/xen/interface/physdev.h b/include/xen/interface/physdev.h
index 2b2c66c..534cac8 100644
--- a/include/xen/interface/physdev.h
+++ b/include/xen/interface/physdev.h
@@ -188,6 +188,16 @@ struct physdev_nr_pirqs {
     uint32_t nr_pirqs;
 };
 
+/* type is MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_GSI or MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_MSI
+ * the hypercall returns a free pirq */
+#define PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq    23
+struct physdev_get_free_pirq {
+    /* IN */ 
+    int type;
+    /* OUT */
+    uint32_t pirq;
+};
+
 /*
  * Notify that some PIRQ-bound event channels have been unmasked.
  * ** This command is obsolete since interface version 0x00030202 and is **

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Xen devel - Nov 2010 - [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: use PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq to implement find_unbound_pirq